Comments by "Daniel B West" (@danielbwest) on "Jordan B Peterson" channel.

He's not much of an academic himself on this topic so i dunno where youre goin with that. But, if its colonialism, what do the leftist gain from this?
7
Do you know how expensive natural gas is to extract? Think with facts instead of your political ideologies
5
What heating law?
4
 @jsore what exactly does he nail?
4
@osirisgolad you bring up some interesting points but I should address two things First, from what I've seen online, there was some form of record keeping in the 20s and 30s. So I'm not sure where you got information that recordkeeping only started in 1983 Two, as I understand it, the reason the NIFC removed the data in question was there were alot of inaccuracies relating to double counting and what constituted a wildfire These all beg some interesting questions. But that's not an excuse to discount climate change when there is science to back it up
2
@osirisgolad I see what you are saying but that validity is only related to the total number of hecters burned, not it's cause. I'm sure i can find on the internet and see if it was dryer then versus now . Also, there is a graph of number of hectars burned since 1916 in research done by Littel et al. It shows that the peak total area of land burned in forest fires only went over 6,000,000 in a year once between 1916 and 1939. And that's with all the double counts and man made forest fires. Yet on the same graph it shows this had happened tree times since 2000. So I think its a strecth to call that a "minor increase" Regarding the cause now, i mean, you could just as easily point to coarse woody debris falling off dead trees or hazardous trees for the increase the rise in wildfires. But dryer conditions are clearly playing a role
2
Of course. This will channel all of you ideologues to his channel 😂
2
The issue is how we extract and manage those resources, sth peterson conveniently ignores
2
... that conservatives want to hear 😅
1
@encouraginglegacy truth is objective, yet conservatives pretend to be the arbiters of truth. How convenient.. Hard truths only seem to apply to others, never to you people. Consider you own bias for once before considering mine
1
I just wonder if people on the right will have the same concerns about costs with this type of coal emission. Guess we'll never find out. Two busy talking outa both sides of your mouth..
1
You realise everything you said about scientists applies to Peterson as well right? Why doesn't he do his own research and publish it instead of making money misinforming people because of his ideology?
1
What you've said has merit. And most people don't want a complete defence on solar. Its not practical now as you've said. The issue is peterson on this anti climate change crusade by telling lies and misinforming people. That has an influence on policy because now people will be fooled into thinking its not worth investing in clean energy. How do we make it better without investing in it? Are people so consumed by their political ideology?
1
@osirisgolad There is clearly a change happening with typhoons, hurricanes tornadoes, amd wildfires. Yet, you just want to shove it under the rug an act as if its not happening which weather events are not unusual? Which period of time is similar to this?
1
@grannyannie2948 but this is the problem. All these fools listen8ng to Peterson and his anti climate change crusade just wanna disregard all the science done that isn't even in this man's field. They aren't motivated by facts. They are motivated by ideology
1
I wonder if your interested in the myths about natural gas, or oil, or fracking...
1
The developing world is the best place to start encouraging solar use no? Do they not have the climate for it more than we do?
1
@loduk how do you know its at the expense of other resources? and where are you getting this information from?
1
@loduk "if". So you don't have evidence this is actively happening other thatn what peterson is telling you
1